In his article on Italian justice (The 'Foxy' thing helps: but in Italy, the courtroom is circus, 5 October), Tobias Jones seems to confuse TV talkshows with the proper work of the judiciary. In saying that Italian justice "never delivers conclusive, door-slamming certainty", he underestimates the system.

Jones states: "There's barely one iconic crime from the postwar years that has persuaded the country that, yes, justice has been done," and goes on to list a number of high-profile cases, but does not mention the great mafia trial led by the magistrates Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino, which led to the convictions of hundreds of criminals. This was the first example of a truly modern investigation into organised crime, cutting across jurisdictions and nations. It remains fundamental for any study of the connections between organised crime, politics and the communications systems. Falcone and Borsellino gave their lives for the sake of justice.

The Italian courts have convicted former ministers and prime ministers for serious crime. Giulio Andreotti, a former defence minister and prime minister, was sent to trial and convicted (although this was later overturned). Bettino Craxi was found guilty. Licio Gelli, one of the leaders of the secret association, P2, was convicted for his part in the 1980 Bologna railway station disaster.

A nation bringing its "guardians" before its own courts is a free nation. It cares for the integrity of the justice system. Yet, despite the judiciary's best efforts to keep the course of justice straight, Jones is sadly accurate when he portrays Italy as a "media circus".

He writes that "the country seems to split into innocentisti and colpevolisti (those who believe in the innocence or guilt of the accused)". The Knox trial is a case in point. As Jones says, "its appeal … lies in the fact that there was sufficient doubt about both the prosecution and defence cases. Italy is divided down the middle." The media takes all opportunities to confuse issues. An invisible barrier separates citizens from the judiciary's activities, giving an inaccurate portrayal of judicial work and individual prosecutors and judges.

Jones also brings up the topic of TV talkshows. He says: "Often studio shows … talk about the ins and outs of these cases for hours". What he fails to mention is that the people invited to talk are usually very well paid, and carefully selected to ensure they give the version of events expected of them.

The judicial system has been attacked on all fronts by ministers and the media. They argue it is controlled by incompetent fanatics, prosecuting innocent people, and voices that dissent from this view are rare. There is little mention of the concrete details of the case.

In this way, the media circus has become a means of political corruption. It works to insulate the government from public discussion and protect misconduct from scrutiny. The owners of the news surely reject the 1977 British royal commission on the press definition on the crucial role of newspapers: "To advance the public interest by publishing facts and opinions without which a democratic electorate cannot make responsible judgments."